Relious vs. Spiritual

[marutidas]

I have been thinking lately, what is more improtant,

Following everything in a religion to the letter. Performing every ritual or attending public worship on specified day of worship. For many Christians is sunday for when God rested. For devotees of Hanuman its Tuesday because he was born on that day. And Muslims I don't know, but I do know they have to pray at least five times a day.
OR
To grasp the meaning of a sacred text and do your best to apply it to life, even going as far as to use other religons a mirror to enhance your understanding of your faith? Semi Eclectic freestyle form of Faith. God encopassing all of the world so there being now difference between faiths?

I know I have ask this question before or one like it in the past. But I really want your imput.

If the former is applied, how can one live in such ridgidity,

If the latter is applied how can someone say they are really serious about their faith.

~~~Maruti Das:confused:

[Daniel]

Rather than religion vs spiritual? If I think of it that latter way, it reminds me of one of those japanese Godzilla vs The Moth movies.

I've seen in my own life that there is value in ceremony in so far as it acts as a means to remember who and what we are. It's when actions are performed without consciousness that problems arise- and then you have a situation where one group who performs a certain ritual in a different way than another group and starts a fight, forgetting entirely what ritual is for and what it points towards. This amounts to a fight for symbology.

We need both, don't we? Things to remind us of good and loving thoughts and well as the courage to embody them. One doesn't just think about sitting on a cushion and meditating - one has to do it. That's a type of ritual. What is happening while one does it is another matter.

There is deeper layer here that need looking at- and that is the extend to which one's thoughts become concretized and worshiped. I believe this is a great danger for the simple reason that the very thing which is supposed to help one find peace and joy can become the very thing which obscures it.

Outer and inner must become one for there to be meaning.

[kara speltz]

I have been thinking lately, what is more improtant,

Following everything in a religion to the letter. Performing every ritual or attending public worship on specified day of worship. For many Christians is sunday for when God rested. For devotees of Hanuman its Tuesday because he was born on that day. And Muslims I don't know, but I do know they have to pray at least five times a day. OR
To grasp the meaning of a sacred text and do your best to apply it to life, even going as far as to use other religons a mirror to enhance your understanding of your faith? Semi Eclectic freestyle form of Faith. God encopassing all of the world so there being now difference between faiths?

I know I have ask this question before or one like it in the past. But I really want your imput.

If the former is applied, how can one live in such ridgidity,

If the latter is applied how can someone say they are really serious about their faith.

~~~Maruti Das:confused:

Friday is the the Muslim sabbath day, at least it was in Iraq. I'm not sure why it's Friday, as opposed to Saturday. If anyone knows, I'd love to find out.

Even though I'm Catholic and attend Mass every Sunday that I'm able, I tend to lean toward the more eclectic. I daily say a prayer from the Huna faith. I love ritual. I enjoy being with folks in my community every Sunday, but, at the same time, I experience the Vatican as "bordering on evil" these days. I agree with little that it says, but still consider myself Catholic. It's definately a paradox for me.

I think the question is a good one that every one needs to keep evaluating in their lives. It's so very easy to get locked into dogma.

Kara

[Steven E. Webster]

Friend,

Don't you see a problem with framing your question in such a black/white, either/or way? I think Kara's response shows that in real life spirituality/religion need not be so either/or.

One can take one's faith tradition seriously without taking it literally or legalistically. Does this mean one is not "serious"? No, I don't think it necessarily means that at all. And who says "serious" is such an important spiritual/religious virtue in the first place?

Steven Webster

[marutidas]

If this is not an either/or question would you not agree that religion needs more spiritual openness? Would you say that is the cause of some much political strife? If everyone was truel allowed to worship as they saw fit, but still looking to the spiritaul leaders for guidence and not instuction, and fulfilling the cultural identiy needs of the religion, could this not be the way smooth out ruffled polical feathers?

[tpdncr4christ]

Following everything in a religion to the letter. Performing every ritual or attending public worship on specified day of worship. For many Christians is sunday for when God rested. For devotees of Hanuman its Tuesday because he was born on that day. And Muslims I don't know, but I do know they have to pray at least five times a day.
OR
To grasp the meaning of a sacred text and do your best to apply it to life, even going as far as to use other religons a mirror to enhance your understanding of your faith? Semi Eclectic freestyle form of Faith. God encopassing all of the world so there being now difference between faiths?


Here's what I think. The bible isn't stone... its not something that is the ultamite law. Think of it as water... so your religion should be like water. There are times when it is strong and sturdy, powerful enough to sink the greatest ships. Other times, it is thin and foggy, too thin to suport any logical answers, but it is still noticeably there. But most of the time, religion, should be liquid water: life sustaining, shapeable, form fitting, cleansing. If you let your religion be solid, you will sink ships. If you let it be vapor, it will slip through your fingers. Treat your religion as if it was water, a precious resource that should not be wasted, and you will find a better life. So I think... :D

[kara speltz]

If this is not an either/or question would you not agree that religion needs more spiritual openness? Would you say that is the cause of some much political strife? If everyone was truel allowed to worship as they saw fit, but still looking to the spiritaul leaders for guidence and not instuction, and fulfilling the cultural identiy needs of the religion, could this not be the way smooth out ruffled polical feathers?

Absolutely! This ridiculous belief that the vast majority of religions have that they have the only truth is what has created so much chaos throughout history. I personally prefer the spiritual to the religion, because religion ends up trying to support its institutions at all costs.

kara

[marutidas]

Is'nt the persuit of Spirituality the persuit of the Individual and Religion the pursuit of a Community? So it would be up the the community to be open and honest about other paths and drop the "THE ONE TRUE WAY" hype and up to the individual to pray, study, meditate and live their faith.

[BronzDragon]

]I have been thinking lately, what is more improtant,

Following everything in a religion to the letter.
[/SIZE] OR
To grasp the meaning of a sacred text and do your best to apply it to life,

The letter means nothing until the spirit gives it life. (The Virginian Owen Wister.)

You’d better try by your own lights.
For anywhere that spook holds sway
Philosopher has right of way.
And to ingratiate his art he makes
A dozen new ones in two shakes.
By going wrong alone you come to rights!
If you would be, become by your own lights.
J.W. Von Goethe (Satanic Proverb)

Books don’t do anything. Humans do things, and they write books and use books and misuse books. Some people read sacred books and are inspired to be more charitable and kind. Others read the same books and find justification for their hatred and fear. (Phil Goldberg)

The aim of language is to transmit an idea from the heart of the speaker into the heart of the listener. But the complete intention can be communicated only by means of face-to-face discourse. Oral communication is superior to written communication. To quote the mouths of scholars and not from the mouths of books. (Rabbi Yehudah ha-Ley)

» Thom says: ☛ As an Existentialist, I do not trust language. Language is elusive, and when written down, loosens its meaning like fruit losing its value. As a Gnostic, I believe one ought to delve within one’s own resources to find the truth you seek. Maybe you listen to the teachers and masters who have traveled this way before you. In the end, it is you who make the choice of where your foot lands next.

[marutidas]

Thom says: ☛ As an Existentialist, I do not trust language. Language is elusive, and when written down, loosens its meaning like fruit losing its value. As a Gnostic, I believe one ought to delve within one’s own resources to find the truth you seek. Maybe you listen to the teachers and masters who have traveled this way before you. In the end, it is you who make the choice of where your foot lands next.

I understand existentialism as well, Absolutue freedom with Absolute responcibility, and yes it all hits the wall of interpritation with different sects of any religion. But I was not talking about that, I was talking about being open enough to learn about different religions and allowing people to find truth for themselves.That what I ment by looking to good spiritual leader for GUIDENCE to put the sacred writtings in to context, to make the path a little less bumpy, but that doesn't meaning it is going to be easy to understand. No matter what a spiritual leader say or does, it is up to the indiviual to make their own decisions on hpw they are going to live their lives, the path can't be walked for them. Too many times, people take religion at face value and follow blindly to what ever a manipulitive leader might say and call it God's will.

And just to clarify, a good spiritual leader doesn't teach absolutes and allows people their individual freedom.

I have been lstening to a guy known as the Traveling mystic, his name is Garuda Das. He explains the 3 wills of God, One is the Permissive will, we are allowed to come to earth and do what ever we want, the Second is the Expressed will, the Sacred texts, the basic pricibles present in all religions, Be pure of mind, body and thought, be good to your fellow being, ect. The Last is the Exstatic will, the true, unconditional-selfless Love of the Divine. This Love is like all Love, It cannot be forced, no one can thump your over the head with the Bible or the Qu'ran or any other sacred text and say, "Love God".

~~~Maruti Das:flower: